An Illegal Court Is in Charge of Juan Requesens Case

Every Venezuelan court must be made up by a judge, a secretary and a bailiff. One of the members of this tripod, as to the court in charge of the case of the Justice First party deputy, is usurping functions since he does not meet the requirements to hold the position. That automatically invalidates that instance. This is the most recent legal irregularity in this case, where not all officials sign their acts, lawyers do not know the file, and the Constitution has been openly violated.
Este reportaje se encuentra disponible también en:
The
name of Yasmily Alexandra Rojas Guzmán bashfully appeared in some Venezuelan
news portals on the evening of Monday, October 29. Shortly before, the lawyers
of deputy Juan Requesens ?86 days imprisoned in El Helicoide, the headquarters
of the Bolivarian National Intelligence Service (Sebin), accused of being
responsible for the failed attack of August 4 against President Nicolás Maduro?
revealed a key detail to the general public ?Rojas
Guzmán, clerk of the trial against the deputy, is not a
lawyer.
Article
510 of the Organic Code of Criminal Procedure of Venezuela provides that the
individual holding that position must be a legal practitioner. Furthermore, the
Venezuelan law establishes that a court is made up of a judge and a bailiff.
Hence, the court in charge of Requesens’ case is not legally made up and is
"invalid."

The
notice that Rojas Guzmán is not a legal practitioner reached the ears of the
defense of the deputy through the personnel of the Palace of Justice. Therefore,
the first week of October, the Internal Policy Committee of the National
Assembly asked the Lawyers' Social Security Institute (Inpreabogado) to clarify
the issue. The answer arrived three weeks later to the hands of lawyer Joel
García, counsel for the defense of Requesens and appointed by deputy Delsa
Solórzano, as a letter. "(...) The abovementioned individual (Rojas Guzmán) is
not registered, to date, as a lawyer of the Republic, to date, errors and
omissions in the computer system excepted," reads the document endorsed by the
president of Inpreabogado, Luis González Blanco.
"The
Constitution provides that every act or individual usurping a function is null
and void and in any act that entails that consequence, the individual incurs
criminal liability under civil and administrative law. But not only the
individual who serves as clerk incurs that irregularity, also the judge, as it
is the judge who appointed the clerk," said lawyer García, before declaring that
Requesens should not be deprived of his freedom for this and other
irregularities.
chevron_leftDesliza la imagen para ver máschevron_right
zoom_inHaz click sobre cada imagen para ampliar
No Signature, but History
Rojas
Guzmán has a long career in the Venezuelan judiciary. According to information
from the Venezuelan Institute of Social Security (IVSS), since February 16,
1997, the almost 44-year-old woman is an active employee of the Executive Office
of the Magistracy, the subsidiary body of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ),
the purpose of which is "to exercise, by delegation, the functions of running,
management, administration, inspection, and oversight of the
Judiciary."
A
list of active members of the savings bank of the judiciary, of February of this
year, confirms that she is employed by said body. She previously served as an
assistant in other trials but, according to the defense, she never served as a
clerk.
chevron_leftDesliza la imagen para ver máschevron_right
zoom_inHaz click sobre cada imagen para ampliar
In
social media, Rojas Guzmán described herself as "a prosperous and chosen
daughter of God," "mother of two wonderful children," "100% Venezuelan," "a
determined fighter" and "a winner." At least until 2013, she was not an active
member of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) or the Fifth Republic
Movement (MVR). And, although she does not express her political preferences, at
least publicly, as most Venezuelans, she criticizes the so-called "Maduro diet".
Some of her close relatives are openly opponents in the social
media.
However,
the presence of Rojas Guzmán in this court is suspicious for the defense and
others, who connect her with high officials of the Venezuelan
Government.
"That
person has not wanted to sign the acts that the court has developed. They want
to put a person who is a lawyer instead, but we all know and the defense of the
other defendants knows that the person who is actually there is not a lawyer,"
said García.
After
being out of the country for a while, Judge Carol Padilla, head of the First
Special Court of First Instance acting as Court of Proceedings, returned to the
court, as the defense of Requesens stated on Monday. Regarding Padilla ?who,
according to Poderopedia, in 2013, was part of the team of the Office of the
Presidency of the National Assembly (AN)?, Borges says that she is the right
hand of the president of the National Constituent Assembly (ANC), Diosdado
Cabello.
On
the day of the hearing of Requesens, a man from outside the court attended an
act that was supposed to be private. The defense learned later that the man was
Padilla’s husband.
Flagrant Irregularities
On
August 7, 2018, at 8:22 pm, Deputy Requesens was getting out of the elevator of
his building in the Terrazas de Club Hípico neighborhood, southeast of Caracas,
with his sister Rafaela, president of the Federation of University Centers of
Universidad Central de Venezuela (UCV). Rumors that the SEBIN was looking for
him were louder at night, while Maduro spoke on a joint radio and television
broadcast.
Witnesses
say that about a dozen officials approached the Requesens Martinez siblings
before they left the building. Some were wearing hoods, other not. Several were
spotted by the security camera of the building. Only five officials sign the
deputy's arrest warrant, even though all the participants in the operation were
to sign it.
The
defense of the deputy asked the Public Prosecutor’s Office proofs of technical
coherence to determine if the video circulating on social media had been edited,
in addition to anthropometric proofs to identify the participating officials and
verify if their names agree with the few who signed the act. However, that was
denied.

On
August 8, at 11:50 am, the president of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ),
Maikel Moreno, informed through his Twitter account that the TSJ had decreed the
arrest of Requesens as "flagrant," and ordered to hold the deputy under the
custody of the State security forces until the ruling Constituent Assembly
resolved on the removal of the deputy's parliamentary immunity. This happened in
a matter of hours.
"The
flagrancy is concomitant with the fact, not after," explains lawyer Joel García,
who has insisted that in the case of Deputy Requesens, for the eight crimes
charged against him (continued public incitement, aggravated attempted homicide
against President Maduro and against the military of the Bolivarian National
Guard, use of explosive devices, criminal association, terrorist financing,
property damage, and treason) one cannot speak of flagrante delicto. The failed
attack occurred on August 4 and his arrest came three days
later.
Yet,
even if the official version on flagrancy were true, the team of Requesens’
lawyers said that another irregularity would be committed. Article 200 of the
Constitution provides that if a member of the parliament commits a flagrant
crime, the competent authority must hold him or her in custody in his/her home.
But Requesens was transferred that night from his home to the Sebin headquarters
in El Helicoide, where he has been for 86 days. However, he was missing for the
first four hours.
chevron_leftDesliza la imagen para ver máschevron_right
zoom_inHaz click sobre cada imagen para ampliar
The
transfer to the court of proceedings, which the Constitution establishes that
must be made within 48 hours after the arrest, took place seven days
later.
The
lawyers report that almost three months later after his arrest, they do not have
the reasoned order "because the court has not issued it yet." And that is not
the only thing they owe the lawyers. "To date, the defense does not have a
printed accusation, we do not know what crimes were charged against him (...) We
appealed in the dark," they say.
Within
the 86 days from the arrest of the deputy, any of his lawyers has seen him, so
they also claimed a violation of the right to a defense. His parents have only
been able to see him five times within that period.
In
a government broadcast nationwide on the night of that August 7, the day of the
arrest of the deputy, when presenting the evidence of the failed attack,
President Maduro showed a video with a testimony of who he claimed was the
operating officer "of the assassins and hitmen" that tried to kill him three
days ago.
It
was the retired sergeant, Juan Carlos Monasterios Vanegas. "The first days of
June (of 2018), I return (...) to Colombia but I had a problem with the
documentation (...). When I arrived in San Cristóbal, I received a text message
from deputy Juan Requesens, telling me that he was in charge of helping me go to
the other side through Julio Borges (...) The instruction was to ask for
Mauricio Jiménez, head of migration affairs of Colombia, when (...) I reached
the Colombian authorities. I entered Colombia without any problem (...) and made
arrangements there to get the drones in," he said in a video where he appears
handcuffed and with his face blurred.
"A
person who is inside the Sebin, without his defense attorney, without a court
and handcuffed is evidence that there is coercion (...) that proof is null and
void," says lawyer García.
Three
days later, the Minister of Communication and Information, Jorge Rodríguez,
presented a video showing a weird Juan Requesens making what seems to be a
confession that complements the version of Monasterios. "Several weeks ago, I
was contacted by Julio Borges, who asked me to help Juan Monasterios to go from
Venezuela to Colombia. I contacted him through messaging. I was in San Cristóbal
and wrote to Mauricio Jiménez, Migration Supervisor. I made the request and they
immediately contacted Juan Monasterios for him to enter from San Antonio to
Cúcuta."
At
the deferred hearing, finally held on August 13, the only day when he could
speak with his lawyers, Requesens told them that he did not remember having
recorded that incriminating video. García, like everyone who knows him, does not
hesitate to assure that Requesens "was not in his sound
mind".
Deputy
Juan Requesens has been different from other cases of Venezuelan political
prisoners. "They have raised the bar, very high," says García, referring to the
multiple irregularities that would void this
process.